Your weekly look at the intersection of AI, advocacy, and politics from the team at MFStrategies | www.MFStrategies.com
A new fault line is hardening: AI in politics is moving from “we’ll disclose if we feel like it” to a world where labels, incident reports, and enforcement become leverage.
Regulators are drawing borders; broadcast gets a national disclosure regime while states like New York build attorney‑general muscle and rapid reporting rules for the biggest model makers, even as Washington hints at a lighter, centralized approach. Into that confusion pours nine‑figure money from AI-aligned groups trying to preempt state power and reward candidates who keep the rules thin.
For campaigns, the practical tension is speed and creative advantage versus reputational blowback and compliance traps across channels. The question hanging over the cycle: who ends up writing the “truth standard” for AI: election agencies, state AGs, or the donors funding the fight?
Mashable Takeaway The FCC just opened a formal rulemaking to require clear labels when AI is used in political ads on TV and radio. Using authority under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, it is considering mandatory on-air and written disclosures for cable, satellite TV, and radio providers, but not for online streaming, with no ban on AI content itself. Nothing changes immediately, but if finalized, these rules would set nationwide disclosure standards for 2024 and future election cycles. Why it matters AI in campaigns moves from a norms issue to a compliance issue for broadcast. If labels advance, expect disputes over what “AI-generated” means and uneven rules between TV/radio and online. This split regime complicates cross-channel ad strategy and vendor contracts for 2024 and beyond. |
|
CNN Politics Takeaway A new AI-aligned super PAC, Leading the Future, backed by Palantir, OpenAI leaders, and venture capital firms, has pledged over $100 million to support candidates who favor light federal AI rules and limits on state-level regulation, while Democrats and some Republicans organize a counter-effort. This money is already shaping midterm fights in states like New York, California, Texas, Illinois, and Ohio, as candidates face pressure over donations tied to Palantir and over new state AI safety laws such as New York’s RAISE Act taking effect in March. Why it matters AI firms are turning regulatory fights into campaign battles, tying candidate viability to their stance on federal preemption and “responsible AI.” That pits national tech money against state-level control and public fear over bills, jobs, and privacy. Small campaigns now face litmus tests on AI money and policy detail. |
|
Most campaigns don’t have AI rules, until it’s a crisis
AI is already showing up in ads, oppo, and “mystery” accounts. And with dozens of states now writing election AI rules, a loose prompt can turn into a compliance or comms problem fast.
MFStrategies’ just launched the second edition of their Political AI Playbook which includes a campaign AI policy template, deepfake response steps, and a practical guide your team can start using today.
Mintz Takeaway New York has passed the Responsible AI Safety and Education (RAISE) Act, creating strict transparency, safety, and 72-hour incident reporting rules for “frontier” AI developers with over $500 million in annual revenue, enforceable by the state attorney general with fines up to $3 million per violation starting January 1, 2027. The law also creates a new state AI watchdog office (DIGIT) inside the Department of Financial Services to collect reports, set rules, and publish annual AI safety reports, positioning New York alongside California as a key state regulator of high-end AI models even as the White House signals interest in a lighter federal framework. Why it matters State AGs just gained real leverage over big AI developers while the White House moves to centralize AI security rules. That sets up state–federal fights over who sets the guardrails. Campaigns and policy shops must assume fast‑evolving, multi-level AI rules when planning tech, data, and messaging. |
|
Worth Thinking About This Week
“Because left alone, this kind of no touch approach is going to lead to an incredible public backlash that is already brewing. People are already sharpening their pitchforks.” -Brad Carson, former Democratic congressman and co-leader of Public First |
|
